Hot Air Survey: July VP Results

posted at 10:41 am on July 12, 2012 by Patrick Ishmael

For the second survey in a row, Bobby Jindal takes the top spot in the VP preference poll. Marco Rubio again takes second. Paul Ryan moves into third ahead of fourth-place holding Allen West, and Condoleezza Rice holds on to fifth.

Readers are still pretty high on Mitt Romney’s chances.

Here’s how the electoral vote predictions were distributed. 270 would be a Romney win.

Demographics were consistent, as is almost always the case. Representative sample of the readership.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

They will fully overlook the fourteenth amendment and centruries of case law that settled “natural born”. The supreme court validates lower court case law by refusing to take any of these nutball birther cases. Black’s Law Dictionary defines natural born, look it up, it will educate you.

Some quotes I will link to for the Bing/google challenged.

cozmo on July 12, 2012 at 12:03 PM

Utter lies.

Just utter lies. There has not been any decision definitely about what “natural born” as a citizen means and a law dictionary is hardly the definitive source on the matter. That’s like citing THE JOY OF COOKING when someone asks what an egg is.

Though your tossing around of various “court” references as “validates” and such, you continue to espouse just utter nonsense interspersed with your immature pejoratives. In other words, you’re a small, little man.

SCOTUS has had many opportunities to take another look at “natural born”. That they have passed very time, shows that the law on natural born is more settled than Roe. They do look at that one now and again.

They gave us a Robert’s like answer. “That is how the law stands, if you don’t like it its your job to change it”. In this case it will take changing the constitution.

cozmo on July 12, 2012 at 12:25 PM

Once again, utter nonsense.

The most current, contemporary statement from any Justice (and therefore, any associate representing the Supreme Court) was from Justice Thomas who has said (rather recently, within the recent past few years) THAT THEY’VE AVOIDED ADDRESSING THE ISSUE OF WHAT “NATURAL BORN” MEANS.

You all, you and some others who appear on these issue posts about eligibility requirements for the Executive Branch, always miss the point at hand:

It’s NOT about ONLY U.S. citizenship, but it IS about what being “natural born” AS A CITIZEN means

One can be a citizen by “being born on US soil” but one cannot be, necessarily, a “natural born” citizen by such (there are other criteria involved and those somewhat mysterious criteria are what are required to be eligible for the Executive Branch and are what remain being argued over).

So, you can be a citizen, born on US soil or on US territory soil, but not be “natural born” per some arguements about what that requirement actually means.

It’s not defined by our Constitution as to what “natural born” means and the persons who wrote that odd requirement into the eligibility reqs in the Constitution drew their references (and that phrase itself, and thus the requirement they made by repeating it there, apparently with purpose, conscientious intention, it certainly is not there randomly)…drew their references from other documents that did or do now define that phrase.

So it’s not unreasonable to refer to the same references that the Founders who wrote the Constitution used to insert that phrase, for that phrase’s definition. And the definition that reaches across those references is that “natural born” MEANS BEING BORN (IN OUR NATION) TO TWO PARENTS WHO ARE/WERE THEMSELVES CITIZENS.

So you can be a CITIZEN (born here, born on a territory, parentage not considered as to citizenship of parents, or be naturalized as a citizen) but not be eligible for the Executive Branch UNLESS you are ALSO “NATURAL BORN”.

It’s not “just” about what and who a citizen is, it’s about what and who a “natural born” citizen is.

To the issue of the post itself, however, I can only repeat, in general, what I’ve been opining for a while now (here, elsewhere):

I think it’s a mistake for Romney to reassociate a former Bush Administration aspect to a Romney Administration, and by that I mean that Romney, in my view, should not be trying to regroup (or appear to regroup) a former personnel-profile by one or many from former Bush Admins.

Not to knock former Bush Admins but they come today with certain balast and it’s a waste of time and history to try to go back in time, so to speak. Romney should be forging his own Administration to form his own Presidency.

And though I have long admired and promoted Jindal AND Rubio as great talent among the GOP, at this rate, I think either would be a mistake for the VP job if for one thing only and that’s their eligibility “cloudiness” as per the ongoing debate about the nature of both’s citizenship (it’s not a debate issue that’s going away, either, so why encourage the strife in the next Administration).

I’ve always favored Paul Ryan for the VP job. I realize his worth in the House, however, so there’s that to consider as to not taking Ryan out of Congress at this time, though he’d make a great VP and possible future President if that’s Romney’s decision.

Let’s see…Christie is far too Leftwing on issues but the man’s a fighter and it’s a fighter Romney says he’s looking for in a VP, so…

Rubio knocked himself down with his amnesty essay, and he has natural born citizen issues that would detract, in other words, he now has ‘issues’.

Jindal is the most pleasant, and he now has the poise needed for camera.

West has a great bio, a good voice, but was either suckered or believed the RINOs on the budget supercommittee deal – in other words he is somewhat undetermined

Ryan is obviously smart, and articulate, but he doesnt have charisma. He would not detract however, but he would have to be presented to the public quickly to build an image before the MSM built one for him

Condi has an image, clean and honest. She would be criticized for being used as a token to steal black votes. However, she is unflappable. She is also not warm, but subdued

Romney needs someone who wont scare the tea party, and who wont have any trick cards up his sleeve, He needs someone pleasant and reassuring. He doesnt need a star. If he goes for a star, he either does great, or the star has feet of clay and he goes down like a brick and his brick is tied to Romney

I would play it safe but go for warmth

The public is scared stiff and see a long cold winter ahead. They need warmth

Those of us in Louisiana really hope that Jindal is not the pick, and not because we would hate to lose him. He is the Obama of the conservatives. He has a group managing him, he does not take questions at public appearances, they rush him in and out before anyone can ask a question. He has taken credit for numerous things that either he had nothing to do with or as they say, “the proof is in the pudding.” In other words he is taking credit when the programs have yet to be implemented and no results can be reviewed. He has been running for a national position since late in his first term. He is intelligent, conservative, a good family man, everything we want in a conservative leader. But it hasn’t panned out in action.